IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/resene/v33y2011i1p119-129.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Use of the Internet for willingness-to-pay surveys: A comparison of face-to-face and web-based interviews

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Börger, Tobias & Hattam, Caroline & Burdon, Daryl & Atkins, Jonathan P. & Austen, Melanie C., 2014. "Valuing conservation benefits of an offshore marine protected area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 229-241.
  2. Zander, Kerstin K., 2020. "Unrealised opportunities for residential solar panels in Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
  3. Lin, Boqiang & Qiao, Qiao, 2023. "Exploring the participation willingness and potential carbon emission reduction of Chinese residential green electricity market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
  4. Soliño, Mario & Raposo, Rosa, 2022. "Contributing to healthy forests: Social preferences for pest and disease mitigation programs in Spain," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
  5. Yoshifumi Konishi & Sho Kuroda & Shunsuke Managi, 2024. "Income-based or Place-based? Carbon Dividends under Spatial Distribution of Automobile Demand," Keio-IES Discussion Paper Series 2024-019, Institute for Economics Studies, Keio University.
  6. Tobias Börger, 2016. "Are Fast Responses More Random? Testing the Effect of Response Time on Scale in an Online Choice Experiment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(2), pages 389-413, October.
  7. Kim, Ju-Yeon & Mjelde, James W. & Kim, Tae-Kyun & Lee, Choong-Ki & Ahn, Kyung-Mo, 2012. "Comparing willingness-to-pay between residents and non-residents when correcting hypothetical bias: Case of endangered spotted seal in South Korea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 123-131.
  8. Kerstin K. Zander & Stephen Garnett, 2020. "Risk and experience drive the importance of natural hazards for peoples’ mobility decisions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 1639-1654, October.
  9. Liebe, Ulf & Glenk, Klaus & Oehlmann, Malte & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2015. "Does the use of mobile devices (tablets and smartphones) affect survey quality and choice behaviour in web surveys?," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 17-31.
  10. Zawojska, Ewa & Czajkowski, Mikotaj, 2017. "Are preferences stated in web vs. personal interviews different? A comparison of willingness to pay results for a large multi-country study of the Baltic Sea eutrophication reduction," Annual Meeting, 2017, June 18-21, Montreal, Canada 258604, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society.
  11. Gillespie, Rob & Kragt, Marit E., 2012. "Accounting for Nonmarket Impacts in a Benefit-Cost Analysis of Underground Coal Mining in New South Wales, Australia," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 1-29, May.
  12. Zander, Kerstin K. & Straton, Anna, 2010. "An economic assessment of the value of tropical river ecosystem services: Heterogeneous preferences among Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2417-2426, October.
  13. Chèze, Benoît & David, Maia & Martinet, Vincent, 2020. "Understanding farmers' reluctance to reduce pesticide use: A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
  14. Ding, Ye & Nayga Jr, Rodolfo M. & Zeng, Yinchu & Yang, Wei & Arielle Snell, Heather, 2022. "Consumers’ valuation of a live video feed in restaurant kitchens for online food delivery service," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
  15. Claire Burch & Michelle Busch & Edward Higgins & Steven Bittner & Nuwanthika Perera & Kevin Neal & Lawrence Burkett & Antonio J. Castro & Christopher Anderson, 2020. "Revisiting a Water Conflict in Southeastern Oklahoma 6 Years Later: A New Valuation of the Willingness to Pay for Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-30, January.
  16. Japelj, Anže & Mavsar, Robert & Hodges, Donald & Kovač, Marko & Juvančič, Luka, 2016. "Latent preferences of residents regarding an urban forest recreation setting in Ljubljana, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 71-79.
  17. Bruno Lanz & Allan Provins, 2015. "Using discrete choice experiments to regulate the provision of water services: do status quo choices reflect preferences?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 300-324, June.
  18. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2011. "Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Comparison of Survey Modes," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(4), pages 309-351, September.
  19. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2010. "Can cheap panel-based internet surveys substitute costly in-person interviews in CV surveys?," MPRA Paper 24069, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  20. Zhifeng Gao & Lisa A. House & Jing Xie, 2016. "Online Survey Data Quality and Its Implication for Willingness-to-Pay: A Cross-Country Comparison," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(2), pages 199-221, June.
  21. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zawojska, Ewa & Meade, Norman & da Motta, Ronaldo Seroa & Welsh, Mike & Ortiz, Ramon Arigoni, 2024. "On the inference about a willingness-to-pay distribution using contingent valuation data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
  22. Oana-Cãtãlina TÃPURICÃ, 2013. "Advantages and Limits of Using Pollution Control Tools as Strategic Options in the Management of Organizations," REVISTA DE MANAGEMENT COMPARAT INTERNATIONAL/REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE MANAGEMENT, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 14(4), pages 585-595, October.
  23. Murakami, Kayo & Ida, Takanori & Tanaka, Makoto & Friedman, Lee, 2015. "Consumers' willingness to pay for renewable and nuclear energy: A comparative analysis between the US and Japan," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 178-189.
  24. Penn, Jerrod & Hu, Wuyang, 2016. "Making the Most of Cheap Talk in an Online Survey," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236171, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  25. Jed J. Cohen & Johannes Reichl, 2022. "Comparing Internet and phone survey mode effects across countries and research contexts," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(1), pages 44-71, January.
  26. Baker, Erin & Bosetti, Valentina & Jenni, Karen E. & Ricci, Elena Claire, 2014. "Facing the Experts: Survey Mode and Expert Elicitation," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 163585, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
  27. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2011. "Are Internet surveys an alternative to face-to-face interviews in contingent valuation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1628-1637, July.
  28. Menegaki, Angeliki, N. & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Tsagarakis, Konstantinos P., 2016. "Towards a common standard – A reporting checklist for web-based stated preference valuation surveys and a critique for mode surveys," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 18-50.
  29. Mir Aftab Hussain Talpur & Madzlan Napiah & Imtiaz Ahmed Chandio & Shabir Hussain Khahro, 2012. "Transportation Planning Survey Methodologies for the Proposed Study of Physical and Socio-economic Development of Deprived Rural Regions: A Review," Modern Applied Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 6(7), pages 1-1, July.
  30. Karolina Kais & Marlena Gołaś & Marzena Suchocka, 2021. "Awareness of Air Pollution and Ecosystem Services Provided by Trees: The Case Study of Warsaw City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-24, September.
  31. Börger, Tobias, 2013. "Keeping up appearances: Motivations for socially desirable responding in contingent valuation interviews," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 155-165.
  32. Kevin J. Boyle & Mark Morrison & Darla Hatton MacDonald & Roderick Duncan & John Rose, 2016. "Investigating Internet and Mail Implementation of Stated-Preference Surveys While Controlling for Differences in Sample Frames," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(3), pages 401-419, July.
  33. Mozumder, Pallab & Vásquez, William F. & Marathe, Achla, 2011. "Consumers' preference for renewable energy in the southwest USA," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1119-1126.
  34. Soliño, M. & Alía, R. & Agúndez, D., 2020. "Citizens' preferences for research programs on forest genetic resources: A case applied to Pinus pinaster Ait. in Spain," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
  35. Guimarães, Maria Helena & Nunes, Luís Catela & Madureira, Lívia & Santos, José Lima & Boski, Tomasz & Dentinho, Tomaz, 2015. "Measuring birdwatchers preferences: A case for using online networks and mixed-mode surveys," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 102-113.
  36. Thierry Blayac & Pierre Courtois & Lucille Sevaux & Hélène Rey-Valette & Anais Page & Nicole Lautrédou-Audouy & Jean-Michel Salles & Frédérique Viard, 2024. "Non-indigenous species and ecological degradations in Marinas: Perceptions and willingness to pay for improvements," Post-Print hal-04596361, HAL.
  37. Jürgen Meyerhoff & Morten Mørkbak & Søren Olsen, 2014. "A Meta-study Investigating the Sources of Protest Behaviour in Stated Preference Surveys," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(1), pages 35-57, May.
  38. Pepermans, Guido, 2014. "Valuing smart meters," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 280-294.
  39. Subroy, Vandana & Gunawardena, Asha & Polyakov, Maksym & Pandit, Ram & Pannell, David J., 2019. "The worth of wildlife: A meta-analysis of global non-market values of threatened species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.